The present invention, in general relates to tool holders and, more particularly, to a tool holder that is adapted to hold an electric drill.
Contractors frequently use electric drills for various purposes. Often they use portable battery powered electric drills, known generally as "cordless" drills to eliminate the interference that might otherwise be caused by an electrical cord or extension cord of a conventional corded-type of a drill that plugs into an electrical outlet.
Frequently, contractors still use corded drills for certain special purposes, such as for continuous duty application where batteries are apt to need frequent recharging or replacement.
Sometimes, contractors climb and work directly off of a ladder and sometimes they work on elevated platforms, commonly known as scaffolding. In either case, an acute danger associated with electric drills exists and that is the danger of dropping the drill. This applies to both cordless and corded drills.
Not only is there risk that the drill can fall from the ladder or scaffolding and be ruined upon impact, but there is danger that it can injure contractors or other personnel that happen to be located below the ladder or scaffolding. This possibility presents a potentially serious threat to safety. A heavy cordless drill falling onto the head of a contractor or a person standing below can result in serious injury and even death under certain circumstances.
In any event, there is a need to secure the drill to the user in some fashion that is convenient for working. Typical holsters that attach to a belt that is worn about the waist are not effective, especially for cordless drills, because they do not adequately secure the drill in place.
A cordless drill has a heavy battery that is typically disposed in the handle. This makes the handle very heavy which in turn causes it to pivot when placed in a conventional drill holster that is disposed about the waist of the user. The cordless drill will continue to pivot until it is disposed at such an angle that it can fall out of the holster.
The tilting action of the holster makes it inconvenient to remove a drill therefrom even when the drill remains confined within the holster because the tilting action disposes the handle of the cordless drill at an inconvenient angle for the user to grasp.
Also waist holsters tend to interfere with conventional tool belts that are worn about the waist. As such, the user/contractor is forced to choose between transporting the tools that he would like to carry in the conventional tool belt or transporting the drill in the holster. When the contractor needs both at or near the same time, this creates a problem. For example, when working off of a ladder the contractor may desire to simultaneously carry with him the cordless drill, a variety of drill bits, a hammer, a pencil, a tape measure, an assortment of screws, an assortment of nails, and other items as well.
The current solution to such a dilemma is to not rely upon a holster for transport of the cordless drill, but merely to hook the drill onto a support of some sort, such as onto the rung of a ladder. Usually, only the top rung is typically fitted with a hook for holding the drill. Also, the present methods for securing the drill in this manner tend to be ineffective at retaining the drill if, for example, it is bumped during suspension from the ladder.
Accordingly there exists today a need for an apparatus which can adequately secure an electric drill to a user in such manner as to provide convenient access to the drill and also permit the user to wear a tool belt, if desired. Clearly, such an apparatus would be a useful and desirable device.
2. Description of Prior Art
Various tool and drill holders are, in general, known. For example, the following patents describe various types of these devices and they also cite at least one holster specifically designed to secure a handgun, not a power tool, and as such even though it is included it is not considered to be analogous art by the applicant inasmuch as each category solves a different problem:
U.S. Pat. No. 1,723,147 to Fourethier, Aug. 6, 1929;
U.S. Pat. No. 4,828,154 to Clifton, Jr., May 9, 1989;
U.S. Pat. No. 4,962,873 to Schattel, Oct. 16, 1990;
U.S. Pat. No. 5,211,321 to Rodriguez, May 18, 1993;
U.S. Pat. No. 5,269,448 to Shoemaker, Dec. 14, 1993;
U.S. Design Pat. No. D 333,215 to Brown, Feb. 16th, 1993; and
U.S. Design Pat. No. D 361,658 to Martin, Aug. 29, 1995.
While the structural arrangements of the above described devices, at first appearance, have similarities with the present invention, they differ in material respects. These differences, which will be described in more detail hereinafter, are essential for the effective use of the invention and which admit of the advantages that are not available with the prior devices.